Seven years have passed since Ali al-Nimr was arrested at the age of 17. He was arrested with several others on February 14, 2012, against the backdrop of the peaceful demonstrations that took place in Saudi Arabia in 2011. In 2014, his name emerged alongside his fellow minors after they were sentenced to death following unfair trials that involvedmany violations of their rights.

In 2019, Ali al-Nimr remains in detention and under imminent threat of execution, along with seven other children facing charges related to the 2011 demonstrations: Dawood al-Marhoon, Abdullah al-Zaher, Saeed al-Sikafi, Salman AlQuraish, Mujtaba al-Swaiket, Abdullah al-Sarih, and AbdulKarimal-Hawaj. According to credible information confirmed by the European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights, there are other children besides these who are also under threat of execution.

In March 2018, the official Saudi media announced legal amendments stating that the death penalty will not be applied to those 15 years of age or younger and that they would be sentenced to no more than 10 years in prison. Juveniles have already been identified as those under the age of 18. These amendments are mentioned in the “juvenile system,” which calculates the child’s status as a “juvenile” based on the Hijri calendar. So far, the applicationsof this system have not been made clear:children are still executed, and the public prosecutor continues to seek the death penalty against children arrested on political grounds.

The arrest of Ali al-Nimr was a clear manifestation of Saudi Arabia’s repression and its various violations at the beginning of the civil and political rights demonstrations in 2011. A legal analysis by judge and independent expert, Zafar Gondal, confirmed the invalidity of the ruling and the judge’s incompetence.

The case of Ali al-Nimr has provoked many international reactioncalling for his protection, including the call of Elena Valenciano,the former chairwoman of the European Parliament’s Committee on Human Rights, in November 2015, to immediately halt the imminent execution of Ali Al-Nimr, Dawood al-Marhoon, and those accused of crimes against the government.

Furthermore, in September 2015, former German human rights commissioner, Christoph Strässer, asked Saudi Arabia to drop the death penalty against minor, Ali al-Nimr, and to respect the international standards set forth in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

In July 2016, several members of the European Parliament sent a letter to Federica Mogherini, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs, pointing out the need to include the subject of Saudi Arabia’s practice of child execution on the agenda.

Several countries on the Human Rights Council have called for the protection of minors from the death penalty, and Ali al-Nimr’s name appeared in some nations’ statements. In September 2015, Ireland expressed its deep concern about reports that note the increasing use of the death penalty.

In addition, various bodies of the Human Rights Council have called for the protection of al-Nimr. In September 2016, four UN rapporteurs wrote to Saudi Arabia about the cases of six detainees, three of whom are sentenced to death: Ali al-Nimr, Mujtaba al-Swaiket, and Munir Al Adam. The letter expressed the rapporteurs’ concerns about torture and ill-treatment, including forced confessions, failure to investigate claims of torture and prosecute torturers, the use of corporal punishment, and the imposition of the death penalty after unfair trials.

On June 8, 2016, the UN Committee Against Torture submitted its concluding observations on the issue of torture in Saudi Arabia. In its report, the committee called for detailed data to be provided on the implementation of the death penalty and upcoming sentences, particularly against children, including Ali al-Nimr.

On October 25, 2016, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child submitted its report on Saudi Arabia’s application of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and urged Saudi Arabia to immediately end the execution of persons under the age of 18, including Ali al-Nimr.

On February 6, 2017, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued a legal opinion demanding that Saudi Arabia immediately release three minors (Ali al-Nimr, Dawood Al-Marhoon, and Abdullah al-Zaher) and compensate them in accordance with international law.

In February 2018, UN rapporteurs and experts warned Saudi Arabia against carrying out the death penalty against six individuals sentenced for crimes they committed when they were under the age of 18, including Ali al-Nimr.

On the seventh anniversary of the arrest of minor Ali al-Nimr, the European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights emphasizes that his detention is a violation of his fundamental right to freedom, as well as a threat to his right to life, as a human and a child. The only remedy in this case is to release him and to drop the death penalty against him and all those who were arrested as children or sentenced on charges that allegedly occurred in childhood.

Official information from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia confirms that the prosecution has changed its request in the case of human rights advocateIsraa al-Ghomgham, converting it from the death penalty to life in prison. This change follows four sessions that were held in the trial of al-Ghomgham beginning in August 2018. The first session took place without a lawyer, followed by three troubled and ambiguous sessions that the authorities did not have al-Ghomgham attend. This comes amidreportst hat the authorities intend to withhold legal assistance from her.

In October 2018, international experts issued a statement listing the violations against female detainees in Saudi Arabia, expressing their deep concern over al-Ghomgham’strial in the Specialized Criminal Court for terrorism,as well as the lack of legal rules. They stressed the importance of not using measures designed to combat terrorism to suppress or curtail human rights work and emphasized that human rights activity and terrorism must not be confused.

The European-Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR) believes that the move to change the prosecution’s request for the death penalty cannot be considered a remedy for the injustice against al-Ghomgham, given that she faces charges related to peaceful practices, freedom of expression, and defense of human rights.

Thus, the basis of her prosecution is unjust and continues to put pressure on peaceful activists.

Furthermore, the prosecution lifted the death penalty on al-Ghomgham while keeping it for four of her fellow detainees in the same case: her husband Mr. Moussa al-Hashim, Ahmed al-Matrud, Ali al-Awayshir, and Khalid al-Ghanim.

This raises questions about the nature of thestandards and laws used, especially since they face charges that are identical or similar to the charges against al-Ghomgham. International human rights lawyer, Oliver Windridge, has analyzed the prosecution’s instruction in this case and concluded in his preliminary brief that the list of charges constituted a violation of international human rights laws because the charges “fall short of the criteria for the most serious crimes, and are also a violation of the right of the accused to freedom of opinion, expression, and protest, with the majority of charges relating to protest activity. ” In the view of the ESOHR, this double standard in the charges and punishments sought by the Public Prosecutor – who reports directly to the king – is proof of the lack of standards in the Saudi justice system.

The ESOHR also stresses that the prosecution’s move brings to the fore the fate of 58 detainees, including 8 children, who face the risk of execution at various levels of litigation even though they face non-serious charges and have not received fair trials. The ESOHR has already observeda number of violations involving the trials, including denying detainees the right to self-defense and extracting confessions under torture.

The ESOHRemphasizes that lifting the death penalty in no way obscuresthe truth about the political use of this punishment in Saudi Arabia, particularly given the increasing number of executions. In 2018, Saudi Arabia executed 149 people. In the first month of 2019, 22 people were executed, including four Yemeniswho were executed en masse despite confirmation that one of them was innocent and information that he was a minor. This comes despite official promises that the Saudi government will change its approach to the death penalty, including Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s April 2018statement, in which he stressed that work was taking place to minimize the death penalty; in reality, 127 executions have been carried out since then.

The ESOHR underscores that the arrest and trial of human rights advocate, Israa al-Ghomgham, is a model of the oppression directed by the Saudi government against anyone who exercises rights such as freedom of opinion, demonstration, etc. The ESOHR makes clear that what al-Ghomgham is experiencing is due to her peaceful human rights activities, her role in the demonstrations in Saudi Arabia in conjunction with the Arab Spring in 2011, and her demand for rights through social media.

The ESOHR places the Public Prosecutor’s change in requesting the death penalty in the context of attempts to distract attention from violations. The organization stresses that any positive change depends on bringing about a radical transformation in the structure and the issuance of verdicts, and it demands a review of all judgments and their compliance with the requirements of a fair trial.

With crown prince Mohammed bin Salman at the helm, 2018 was a deeply violent and barbaric year for Saudi Arabia, under his defacto leadership.

This year execution rates of 149 executions, shows an increase from than previous year of three executions), indicating that death penalty trends are soaring and there is no reversal of this trend in sight.

The execution rates between 2015-2018 are amongst the highest recorded in the Kingdom since the 1990s and coincide with the ascension of king Salman to the throne, upon which executions averaged 151.5 during his reign, peaking at 2015 with 157 executions. Such alarming statistics indicate that Saudi Arabia is experiencing one if its darkest periods of repression, under the watch of the current king and his son, the crown prince. There are also concerns that the actual execution rate is higher, as ESOHR has found that Saudi Arabia does not officially report all of the executions that it implements.

New trends in the death penalty have also emerged in 2018. Worryingly, this year has witnessed an unprecedented expansion in scope of the use of politically motivated death sentences and death penalty recommendations .

In recent years political death sentences have been disproportionately used against Eastern province activists, using trumped up violent charges despite peaceful dissent, and this discriminatory trend has continued on in 2018. However, this year there has been a widening in scope in use of the death penalty, as the authorities continue to employ it as a political tool of terror, even in the absence of trumped up violent charges. Consequently, new segments of civil society have now been targeted via the death penalty, including female human rights defenders and peaceful clerics, preachers and critics within the kingdom.

This was compounded by a 2018 UN report published by the (now former) Special Rapporteur on counter terrorism and Human Rights, Ben Emmerson, who highlighted serious concerns regarding ‘Use of the death penalty following manifestly unfair trials’, as well as the issuing of death sentences against vulnerable individuals such as those with psycho-social disabilities, minors and those who ‘had been convicted of political offences not involving the use of violence’.

Whilst public relations companies went to great lengths to hail Bin Salman as the mastermind behind ‘Vision 2030’, a plan which was marketed as a blueprint for reform and prosperity in Saudi Arabia, it has since transpired that these glittery reforms were superficial and a mere distraction strategy from the deep repression being employed against civil society.

In this regard, Mohammed bin Salman has gone to great lengths to rally support for his ‘modernisation’ plans, using the death penalty issue as a flag to show ‘reforms’. During an international public relations tour in April 2018, in a televised interview with TIME, Mohammed bin Salman said the following when asked about whether there would be an end to executions:

“We’ve tried to minimize (the death penalty). There are a few areas we can change (or lower the sentence) from execution to life imprisonment. So we are working for two years through the government and also the Saudi parliament to build new laws in that area. And we believe it will take one year, maybe a little bit more, to have it finished. Yeah, of course it’s an initiative. But we will not get it 100 percent, but to reduce it big time”.

However, this statement is not reflected in the death penalty statistics of 2018. Execution rates have sky rocketed in the last four years do not indicate any attempts to ‘minimise’ or ‘reduce’, with 2018 showing an increase in executions from the previous year.

Furthermore, if such an intention to reduce the death penalty was genuine, it has not been officially reported and neither has a corresponding immediate moratorium on existing death sentence cases been imposed until the new laws are in place. Therefore, there is no evidence to support the crown prince’s claims.

This recent recourse to the death penalty, goes against global trends towards abolition of the capital punishment, and questions Saudi Arabia’s commitment to human rights principles, namely the right to life, which is a non-derogable and fundamental human right:

“Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life”. (ICCPR, Article 6)

These concerning 2018 execution rates and trends reflect the wider abysmal state of the human landscape in Saudi Arabia, a year which witnessed a crackdown on women’s rights defenders who were later tortured in detention, as well as the murder of extra territorial murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, whom Saudi Arabia acknowledged on October 19, 2018, was killed in its Istanbul consulate by its own agents sent from Saudi Arabia.

Trends in the Death penalty

Use of the Death Penalty Against Female Activists

In August 2018, during her first trial, the Saudi public prosecution called for the death penalty sentence against female human rights defender, Israa Al-Ghomgham, a well known Arab spring female human rights defender from Qatif. This appears to be a dangerous precedent, as it will be the first time that the death penalty sentence has been demanded against a women human rights defenders.

Israa was detained in December 2016 during a raid on her home without a warrant, and was held in arbitrary detention for 32 months without access to a lawyer. Israa hearing was held at the notorious Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) in Riyadh and her trial proceedings so far have been grossly unfair.

During her first court session, Israa was denied a lawyer, and during both her second and third hearing, Israa was not transported to the courtroom and remained absent. Israa’s trial is still ongoing, and the final outcome of the trial still has not been concluded. Israa is being trialled en masse, and all the trumped up charges levelled against Israa part of her charge list her are non-violent in nature, yet the prosecution is still pursuing the death penalty for her, using dubious domestic counter terror laws.

All this comes despite UN experts naming her in a statement issued in October in which they stated:

‘Referring to Ms. Al-Ghomgham’s trial in the Specialised Criminal Court, the experts condemned the conflation of human rights activities with terrorism. “Measures aimed at countering terrorism should never be used to suppress or curtail human rights work.’

There are also concerns for the women human rights defenders (WHRD’s) arrested during the crackdown on women’s rights activists in May 2018.

The 2018 crackdown on WHRD’s included: LoujainHathloul, Aziza al-Yousef and Iman al-Nafjan, Nouf bin abdulaziz, Mayaa Al-Zahraini, Samar Badawi and Naseema Al-Sadah amongst others. It is believed these WHRD’s will now face national security cases in the SCC, and it is feared that the outcome of Israa’s trial may well act as a precedent for their cases when they will eventually come to trial.

Worryingly, pro-government newspaper Okaz, published an article followed the initial first wave of arrests of Loujain, Aziza and Iman, indicated that the trial of these WHRD’s may well lead to taa’zir(discretionary) death penalties.

Widening of the scope of politically motivated death sentences

In previous years, the death penalty has been used as a tool of terror disproportionately against Eastern province activists, seeking to equate their peaceful activism with terrorism, as they did with Sheikh Nimr in 2016.

This trend has continued on into 2018, particularly with the ongoing high-profile mass trial of human rights defender Israa Al-Ghomgham. This was also concurred in Ben Emmerson’s UN report, where he highlights that since his visit in 2017 ‘several more individuals have been sentence to death and face imminent execution for their involvement in pro-democracy demonstrations in the east of the country in 2011 and 2012’.

In 2018, a new pattern related to politically motivated death sentences has emerged. In recent years, the Saudi authorities went to great lengths to use trumped up violent against peaceful activists. This is exemplified with the case of non-violent social justice activist Sheikh Al-Nimr, who is famously quoted as saying ‘the roar of the word, not the roar of bullets’. During Sheikh Nimr’s trial, the authorities went to great lengths to frame him as violent, levelling fabricated, trumped up violent charges against him. Following a grossly unfair trial and after a long campaign to equate and blur his non-violent activism with terrorism, the Saudi government executed Sheikh Nimr as part of a mass execution of 47 other individuals which included protestors and minors.

However, a more recent development during 2018, is that Saudi Arabia’s Public Prosecution, which reports directly to King Salman, has intensified its horrific demands for the death penalty against an increasing spectrum of government critics, shamelessly demanding the death penalty on the basis on peaceful charges. Consequently, new segments of civil society have now been targeted via death penalty, including female human rights defenders and peaceful clerics, preachers and critics from all regions of the kingdom, but the difference is that now the authorities instead have no hesitation in shamelessly using solely peaceful charges to justify death sentences. For example, in the case of Israa Al-Ghomgham, all the trumped up charges levelled against as part of her charge list her are non-violent in nature, yet the prosecution is still pursuing the death penalty for her.

Consequently, in September 2017, the Saudi authorities undertook a crackdown on dissent, in which several clerics were arbitrarily detained and later taken to trial.

In September 2018, the public prosecution called for the execution of Sheikh Salman Al-Odah, a popular cleric, during his first court hearing at the SCC. Al-Odah was arrested in connection with his refusal to support Mohammed Bin Salman’s policies towards Qatar and posted a tweet calling for reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Qatar just before his arrest in September 2017. Sheikh Al-Odah’s trial was initiated secret and closed, and even he himself was not informed of the commencement of the trial. The was charged under counter terror laws and some of his 37 charges include: ‘Seeking to spread sedition’ and ‘incitement against the rulers’. In addition, Al-Odah has suffered severe health problems during the course of his detention. The final outcome of his secret trial, which has been marred by due process concerns, has yet to be determined, with the next hearing postponed until February 2019.

In the same week of September 2018, two other clerics were also targeted in a similar fashion during trials at the SCC. The Saudi public prosecution also recommended the death penalty against prominent cleric Awad Al-Qarni who arrested in September 2017, as well as public figure and scholar Ali Al-Omari, who was also a director for a channel called ‘Al-Shabab’ and featured in several popular TV shows. Likewise, sources report that demands for the execution of the distinguished Islamic scholar Hassan Farhan al-Maliki, were made by the public prosecution during his trial which began October 2018. Al-Maliki is charged in relation to his religious beliefs that conflict with that of the official extremist religious institution. He is known for his non-sectarian, moderate and inclusive Islamic teachings.

Mass death penalty trials

In recent years, mass death penalty cases became commonplace, as exemplified by the trial of 32 individuals referred to in Saudi media as ‘Iranian spy ring’ trial, in which 32 individuals were put on trial, and resulted in 12 of them receiving a death sentence. Unfortunately, this trend of ‘en masse’ death penalty trials has continued on into 2018.

During the first court session of this trial, the Saudi prosecutors demanded the death penalty for all individuals apart from Al-Muzayin. This mass trial is ongoing and the final outcome and sentencing is expected in 2019.

2018 Statistics on Death Penalty

2018 Execution Rates

At 149 executions in 2018, execution rates exceed the previous year figures, and overall the statistics indicate a soaring of execution rates in the last three years. Whilst 2018 rates are not highest of recent years, there has been no dramatic reduction in the Saudi authorities use of the death penalty since 2015. To the contrary, executions rates between 2015-2018 have been at the highest since 1992.

Execution statistics breakdown by nationality

Out of 149 individuals executed, 74 of those where Saudi citizens, whilst the remainder of those executed were foreign nationals, with the exception of one stateless person (Bidoon).

2018 Executions statistics for 2018 show that 50% of those executed were foreign nationals. 22% of those executed were Pakistani nationals, making them the foreign demographic group with the highest execution rates (33 Pakistani nationals were executed in total). All other foreign nationals executed were of Middle Eastern, Asian or African nationalities, with the exception of one stateless individual (Bidoon).

In 2018, 59 individuals were executed for drugs related offences, 79 for murder related offences and 11 for other offences such as armed robbery and adultery. International law stipulates that the death penalty can only be implemented by retentionist states for the ‘Most serious of crimes’, which has been interpreted as being intentional killing. Drugs related crimes do not fall under the category of most serious crimes.

Execution of Women

Two women were executed this year. One was an Ethiopian woman, whilst, another Indonesian woman, Tuti Tursilawati. The latter execution was not being officially announced by the Saudi government. In this regard, several media outlets including‘ABC News’ and ‘Diplomacy’, published articles on the Saudi execution of an Indonesian women maid worker in March 2018, who was executed without informing the concerned Indonesian diplomatic authorities. The execution was carried out despite the Indonesian president’s request to lessen the punishment after obtaining information about the lack of fair trial conditions, such as the insufficient access to legal aid. The unfair nature of this case, also highlights that foreign nationals are also particularly vulnerable to a deprivation of due process.

The execution of minors

Execution announcements are published following implementation of an execution order via portal spa.gov. This official publication does not mention the ages of those executed, but based on official reports there were no minors executed in 2018. However, ESOHR cannot confirm, there were nominors executed in 2018, especially with the existence of precedents for Saudi Arabia in the execution of minors, and the presence of minors currently on death row awaiting execution.

Issues related to reporting of executions: Misreporting

The official source of executions in Saudi Arabia is via the portal spa.gov. which announces the execution once it has been implemented. However, according to ESOHR’s monitoring, the government has concealed one executions that take place and failed to officially announce the implementation, as in the case of the Indonesian woman executed in October 2018. This is very alarming, as it means that official statistics from the Saudi government may be heavily under reporting execution rates in a way which is grossly misleading and inaccurate. The execution rates reported by ESOHR have been solely based on official execution reports from the spa.gov portal, with the exception of the execution of the Indonesian woman, who execution was reported in foreign media. This raises questions as to how many other executions cases have gone unreported by the Saudi authorities.

Individuals at risk of execution

As well as monitoring execution rates, ESOHR also monitors those at risk of execution. Currently, 58 individuals stand at risk of execution, at different legal stages,8 of whomwere minors at the time of the ‘crime’, including: Ali Al-Nimr, Dawood Al-Marhoon, Abdullah Al-Zaher, Abdul Kareem Al-Hawaj, Mujtaba Al-Suwaiket, Said al-Skafi, Salman al-Quraish, and Abdullah Al-Sarih.

In particular, in November 2018, the case files of 12 men convicted of spying for Iran and spreading the Shia faith, including that of Abbas Al-Hassan, was transferred to the Presidency of the State Security (PSS) by Royal Decree. All these men have exhausted all legal remedies and such administrative file transfers represents a strong indication that their files are being prepared for an imminent execution. This comes despite seven United Nations rapporteurs issuing a statement in May 2018, calling upon Saudi Arabia to halt executions that threaten the lives of Abbas Hassan and others individuals accused of espionage for Iran in Saudi Arabia.

Areas of concern surrounding the death penalty

Detention and the use of torture

Recent examples on violations of torture, cruel and inhumane treatment undertaken during detention are well documented. Such violations are usually done during interrogation to elicit information and torture-based confessions.

Scholar, Salman Al-Odah, who may be sentenced to death, was subjected to 24 hour long durations of interrogation, derived of sleep, had his feet shackled and was placed in solitary confinement. He was also denied medical care for dangerously high blood pressure to the point where he had to be hospitalized.

Ali Al-Awaishir, who is facing a death penalty recommendation, as part of the mass trial alongside Israa Al-Ghomgham, was verbally psychologically tortured by insults such as being called names such as ‘dog’, ‘donkey’ and ‘animal’. Al- Awaishirwas threatened during his interrogation by an investigator who said:

“If you do not confess, we will bring your children and torture and whip you in front of them, then burn you until death. Then we will issue a report to say that you died of a heart attack”.

Al-Awaishir was also physically tortured by being asked to raised his handcuffed hands above his head and stand for long periods of time until he became unconscious. He was also subjected to whipping.

Using evidence such as torture based confessions to sentence individuals to death, renders such death sentence invalid and unlawful. ESOHR has documented multiple examples of torture based confessions being used and accepted by Judges at the SCC, despite complaints made by defendants that they have been tortured into given those confessions. Such complaints are routinely ignored by judges. This was the case for child protestor Ali al-Nimr, who was sentenced to death in 2014.

In death penalty cases, individuals can be subjected to multiple violations of due process during various legal stages, including: detention, pre-trial, in-trial and post-trial. Thus, any death penalty, where due process and a fair trial have not been strictly observed can be considered unlawful. In many of the cases documented by, death penalties were issued after grossly unfair trials and violate international law on imposition of the death penalty.

Withholding the bodies after execution

In 2018, the international community was overcome with horror, after learning that Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, on what appears to be an order from the highest Saudi authorities. Jamal’s body was never recovered, with some reports claiming it was dissolved in acid. In fact, the Saudi authorities have used the barbaric practice of hiding detaining the bodies of individuals who have been executed or are victims extrajudicial killings. Since January 2016, it has systematically engaged in this practise, concealing the whereabouts of the corpses and denying the families the right to perform burial rites. To date, ESOHR has documented a total of 32 bodies which have remained hidden and have not been returned to their families.

Saudi Arabia has carried out the death penalty against people who exercised peaceful freedom of expression, reflecting its willingness to disregard dissenters’ right to life whenever it wants. On January 2, 2016, the Saudi government carried out a mass execution of 47 people, including social justice activist Sheikh Nimr Al-Nimr, as well as child minors Mustafa Abker, Meshaal Al-Faraj, and Abdul Aziz Al-Ghamdi, child demonstrator Ali Al-Ribh, protrstor Mohammed Al-Shuyukh, Mohammed Al-Suweimel who had non-violent charges, along with the mentally handicapped Abdul Aziz Al-Taweeli.

Not only did the Saudi government carry out these unjust sentences and ignore all international criticism and accountability, it also completed a series of violations and crimes by detaining some of the bodies. Following these the executions, some families issued statements demanding the handover of the bodies of their loved ones for burial according to their wishes or directives. Some families also submitted various claims to the official authorities.

In July 2017, the Saudi government carried out another death penalty against victims sentenced to death after a trial that largely lacked the most basic conditions for fair trials. Its victims were Yousef Al-Mushaykhes, Amjad Al-Moaibad, Zaher Al-Basri, and Mahdi Al-Sayegh. The charges against them included the exercise of freedom of expression and demonstration, along with other charges including use of violence without any concrete evidence other than confessions under torture and coercion. None of the charges were classified as serious crimes. After the families learned of the executions through the media, they published a statement calling for “the bodies to be turned over.”

Between 2011 and 2018, the government, in the context of its use of excessive violence and arbitrary measures, has violated the right to life and killed at least 83 people in Qatif alone in a variety of ways, including torture and arbitrary executions, street assassinations, incineration, raids, and prison killings. Victims of extrajudicial killing whose bodies have not yet been returned to families include the child Waleed Al-Orayedh.

After the mass execution in January 2016, Saudi Arabia has clearly renewed its practice of the bodies of holding on to the bodies of victims of excessive violence and summary or arbitrary killing. With the case of journalist Jamal Khashoggi– whom Saudi Arabia acknowledged on October 19, 2018, was killed in its Istanbul consulate by its own agents who came from Saudi Arabia and has yet to offer any official indications so far about the fate of his body.

Religion is employed in a is distorted, radical and extremist manner by the Saudi government, who adopt the ultra-conservative religious interpretation of Wahabbism. The Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, asserted that he will destroy extremism, return to mainstream Islam, and undertake steps such as receiving a delegation of American evangelical Christians. However, there were no signs that the end of extremism would encompass a cessation of its use against human rights defenders.

Counter Terror Court: Specialized Criminal Court (SCC)

the SCC was enacted in 2008, and was initially set up by the Saudi government as a counter terrorism court to try individuals accused of terrorism, but has been increasingly used to trial various political detainees, such as human rights defenders, protesters, children and journalists.
The irreversible nature of the death penalty means that it can only implemented only if strict procedural safeguards have been strictly observed, and this extreme ‘penalty can only be carried out pursuant to a final judgement rendered by a competent court’[1]. Human rights case law also clarifies that any death sentence arising from an unfair trial is void and unlawful.

ESOHR has documented multiple trials held at the SCC which fell grossly short of international standards of due process and a fair trial. In addition to unfair trials, they also have no codified jurisdiction, which makes it difficult for defendants or acting lawyers to obtain an adequate defence.

The lack of jurisdiction has enabled the Saudi government, in more than 10 years since its inception, to expand the types of victims it punishes, without victims being able to object on the basis of their trial. In general, the court has become a holocaust for all those who the government wants to punish, and an apparatus used to intimidate civil society.

The judicial system itself as well as the courts being used to put individuals on trial are non-independent in nature and heavily controlled by the state. Furthermore, the entire infrastructure of the judicial system, is undermined by a recent royal decree which ordains that the public prosecution should directly report to King Salman for the purpose of ‘observing justice and protecting society’. However, such a decree will undermine the independence of the public prosecution.

The establishment of a set of domestic laws has overridden and taken precedent overmany of the international conventions to which Saudi Arabia is a state party to, such as the convention against Torture. Thus, domestic laws are used as apparatus to allows the practice of repression in the name of law.
In 2007, local Cybercrime laws were enacted, which give the authorities the right to punish any those who deals with electronic devices, storage media or social access networks by imprisonment of up to 6 years and a fine of up to 500,000 riyals.
The Terrorism Crimes and its Financing System (Also known as the counter terror law) also established in 2014 and later revised in 2017. This laws broad formulation allows for a wide range of criminalization, where even criticism of the king or the crown prince can be considered a terrorist act. ESOHR, in cooperation with others organisations, produced legal analysis of the two versions of the two sets of counter terrorism laws. Legal expert Michael Newtonconcluded that the law “removes the little remaining respect for human rights and fails to comply with legal standards.”
This is concurred by the former UN Rapporteur on the protection and promotion of human rights in the context of counterterrorism, Ben Emmerson, who said that the counter terrorism in Saudi Arabia is used against activists and others.

Discretionary sentences (taa’zir) also result in biased sentencing. ESOHR noted that two sets of punishments were handed down for the same charges. ESOHR also noted that the same charges that were brought against other prisoners led to them receiving death sentences and others were sentenced to a variable number of years. This is called taa’zir. This means that the judge uses his own discretion in the judgment sets a punishment as he sees fit. This allows huge scope for bias and politicization to influence sentencing.

This comes despite the fact that Islamic schools of thought do not see in any case that Ta’zirshould result in the death penalty, but Saudi Arabia does not mirror the opinion of the majority Islamic jurists, and opts for a rare and narrow interpretation of taa’zir.

Media smear campaigns

In Saudi Arabia the media is heavily regulated and there is no independent media within the kingdom, and journalist who offer critical opinions are regularly imprisoned. Pro-government media represent a form of ideological state apparatus which are used to influence public opinion thorough the use of smear campaigns which smear the reputation of activists, may have sectarian undertones and publish false claims, attempting to swerve public opinion into believing a death penalty is warranted. Such smear campaigns have been documented in several cases, most notably the aggressive smear campaign against Sheikh NimrBaqir Al-Nimr, in which the defamatory campaign against him was so intense, it was published in both national and transnational media networks linked to Saudi Arabia. Such smear campaign violates an individual’s right to the presumption of innocence. Furthermore, the media as a repressive mechanism, seeks to influence and dominate the public sphere by marketing these death sentences as the application of God’s divine law (according to Shariah law), leaving no room for civil society to refute such a death sentence.

Outlook for 2019

Whilst ESOHR acknowledge the importance responses following sheikh Nimr execution by UN High commissioner’s office, such as the statements of condemnation following Sheikh Nimr’s execution in 2016, it should be noted that this reactive response came after the execution and what is required now is a more preventative strategy, proactive response by the international community. In this regard, in 2018, some positive progress has been made, following various statements calling on Saudi Arabia to halt the execution of children, those accused of spying and even individually named in their statements Ms Israa Al-Ghomgham and in another statement Abbas Al-Hassan. The UN issued a statement decrying Saudi Arabia’s persistent use of counter terror laws to prosecute activists and named reformer Salman Al-Odah. ESOHR supports these important advocacy efforts by the UN in this regard.

With execution rates showing no sign of decline, and misreporting by the Saudi government, the outlook for 2019 is very bleak. Stronger international condemnation is required to apply pressure on Saudi Arabia to reverse this shameful record of death, that has earned Saudi Arabia it’s reputation as an ultra repressive state.

]]>https://www.esohr.org/en/?feed=rss2&p=209002090INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER CONCLUDES THAT THE INDICTMENT OF ISRAA AL-GHOMGHAM AND FIVE OTHER IS DISPROPORTIONATE AND UNFAIRhttps://www.esohr.org/en/?p=2080
https://www.esohr.org/en/?p=2080#respondSun, 13 Jan 2019 14:50:34 +0000http://www.esohr.org/en/?p=2080Israa and international human rights lawyer Oliver Windridge

Initial legal observations which have concluded that the indictment against female Human rights defender Israa Al-Ghomgham and five other individuals is a violation of international human right law, has been recently released by international human rights lawyer Oliver Windridge in a short memo.

After a legal analysis, Windridge found several areas of immediate concern in the indictment, namely: A reliance on confessions as evidence, the non-serious nature of the ‘crimes’ which do not meet the criteria of crimes for which the death penalty can be applied, and a violation of the accused right to freedom of expression and protest, as the majority of the charges are related to protest activity.

“The call by Saudi Arabia’s Public Prosecutor for the execution of five of the six individuals for these offences is, in my opinion, a sentence lacking any sense of proportionality. Accordingly, the request for the imposition of the death penalty is, in my view, a violation of international human rights law”.

These initial observations will form part of a comprehensive full legal analysis report which will be released in last January 2019.

Shocking developments in the human rights situation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia appeared during 2018 in the form of systematic crimes and violations that, in their totality, signal an unprecedented stage in the country’s poor history of human rights. The government has not stopped at extrajudicial or arbitrary killings, unfair trials, torture, arbitrary arrests, intimidation, and the crushing of freedoms at home; rather, it has extended its reach outside the country to ensnare activists in exile fleeing the domestic policy of repression.All these outrages have left citizens and observers increasingly concerned about the country’s general situation, creating concerns about personal safety and raising the possibility thatindividuals and their families will be targeted. The most egregious, bloody, and repugnant incident was the official crime of killing journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which originated from the highest levels of decision-making in the country. This was quickly followed by the news of the crime of harassment and torture of the human rights advocateLoujain,and her fellow female activists. These and other events are a blatant expression of the disasters and afflictions that result from the style and form of governance currently practiced in Saudi Arabia, which completely monopolizes political decision-making, violently abolishes civil society, eliminates the effectiveness of judicial and legislative authority, and totallyremovesany space for media freedom.

The 2018 scene is one of the fruits of a deteriorating phase associated with the new era, especially after the appointment of Mohammed bin Salman as Crown Prince in mid-2017, a period whererepression noticeably increased as a method used by the ruling family.The year 2017 was marked by persecution, intimidation, and the breakdown of civil society, according to last year’s report from the European-Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR). However, this was not just a phase: oppression and deterioration are still on the rise.

The killing of journalist Khashoggi was the height of repression and criminality. Thisincident revealed, through muffled screams, the growing accumulation of powers held by the Crown Prince,making plain not only the practices of the state, but also, what is more dangerous, the political and administrative approach followed in the country and the type of men holding power. Violations continued throughout the year, touching all sectors of society and its most vulnerable groups. Official agencies were used to target human rights advocates and activists and to promote torture in prisons, while Saudi Arabia continued to disregard its international obligations to protect rights and hold those responsible for violations and failed to submit violations against women, children, and the elderly.

The reality of Saudi human rights abuses contradicts the statements and promises made by Saudi officials, especially the Crown Prince. On March 5, in an interview with The Telegraph, the Crown Prince said that Saudi Arabia “has made significant progress in human rights in a short time,” while in reality human rights have deteriorated, especially after he became Crown Prince. Nearly ten weeks after his statement, femalehuman rights advocates and activists were arbitrarily detained for legitimate activities.

In an interview with American news channel, CBS, the Crown Prince asserted that allowing women to drive was only the first step toward granting women their rights to “equality with men,” stating that Saudi Arabia had already come “a very long way and has a short way to go.” In contrast, despite lifting the ban on women driving, the intensity of violations against women has increased, with the arrest of leading women’s rights advocates and prominent human rights activists. The Public Prosecution has also requested the execution of human rights advocateEsraa al-Ghomgham.

In an April interview with Time magazine, the Crown Prince indicated that there is movement to significantly minimizecapital punishment without eliminating it completely; however, Saudi Arabia continued to issue and carry out executions. As of December 26, 111 executions had been carried out, 41 of them on drug charges, which are not considered the most serious charges in international law.

The Crown Prince’s appearances in major media outlets helped conceal the worsening human rights situation. Some of the media statements were warmly received politically in some countries and created a misleading international media image of the Crown Prince, who is hostile to human rights. At a time when media outlets were heavily featuring the Crown Prince, they did not also present the other side in a balanced way by giving time toindividuals who contradicted Bin Salman’s narrative. Yet the events of 2018 showed that this media and political celebrationwas not systematic because there were no governmental or civil mechanisms capable of fulfilling those promises. They were presented at a time when the King and Crown Princewere strengthening their graspover all authorities and decisions in the country.

In addition, the killing of journalist Khashoggi and its aftermath sent many signals, one of which is the lack of real legal mechanisms inside Saudi Arabia that would hold accountable perpetrators of violations and crimes, whether individuals or agencies. It appears that the law and its mechanisms are under the full control of the influential.

The violations and crimes committed by Saudi Arabia in 2018, as well as the statements and reports of the United Nations and international reactions, laid bare all the slogans and promises made, especially those promoted by the Crown Prince.

Extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions:

On April 5, the Crown Prince promised in a television interview to work to significantly reduce the execution rate. Yet,in August, four months after his statement and in complete contradiction with it, the Public Prosecution, which is directly linked to King Salman, soughtthe death penalty forhuman rights advocate, Esraa al-Ghomgham, and others who are considered accomplices onseveral charges, even though they were peaceful activists whose activities were mainly demonstrations. They include al-Ghomgham’s husband, Mr. Musa al-Hashim, Ahmad al-Matroud, Ali Aweishir, and Khaled al-Ghanem. ThePublic Prosecution also demandeda prison sentence of up to 20 years for activist Mujtaba al-Muzayn on charges related to legitimate demonstrations and expression ofopinions. This matter represented a shocking and unprecedented development in the annals of capital punishment.

The shocks continued in September, when the Public Prosecution also demanded the death penalty be handed down against Sheikh Salman al-Ouda in the first session of his trial, which lacked the necessary conditions for a fair trial. The Public Prosecution’s appetite for the death penalty continued, with its application toDr. Ali al-Amri, Sheikh Awad al-Qarni, and Sheikh Hassan Farhan al-Maliki, based on their opinions and activities.

In the first quarter of 2018, the rate of executions rose by 72% compared to the first quarter of 2017. From the beginning of the year through December 26, 143 executions were carried out, 57 of which were based on drug crimes considered non-serious in international law.

Moreover, despite Saudi Arabia’s claims to take measures to give the judiciary independence and protect it from any influences, there are no concrete signs of this;rather, there is an increased use of the Public Prosecutor and the Specialized Criminal Court to target and retaliate against activists, and the verdicts handed down in trials remain unfair, including final death sentences for children on charges such as demonstrating and expression of opinion. The execution may be carried out at any moment.

According to ESOHR monitoring in November, there were 58 detainees under threat of execution in various stages of litigation, eight of whom were children with final death sentences. These are a small fraction of the estimatedhundreds of people threatened with execution in Saudi prisons. According to research conducted on many of the cases of these58 detainees, their trials departed significantly from the requirements of fair trials, and they confirmed to the courts that their confessions were extracted under torture.

Among the detainees under the threat of execution at any moment, 12 of whom are charged with spying for Iran, fear for their lives increased after their files were sent to the Presidency of State Securityon November 1, indicating that the sentences handed down against themcould be carried out at any moment, despite the lack of a fair trial. Some of them were tortured, and some threatened withthe imprisonment oftheir family or wife if they did not sign statements written or fraudulently drafted by investigators. One of them,Yusuf al-Harbi, is known to have attemptedsuicide because of the torture he suffered, according to what isreported in the judgment document.

The ESOHR has also documented the number of foreign nationals executed over the past years, the lack of fair trials for them, and the large number of them executed on drug charges. The documentation indicates that Saudi Arabia executed 504 people from 29 countries from 2004 to 2017, and it executed 71 people from the beginning of 2018 through December 26.

While it is difficult to access all the statements of those sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia, especially those accused of drug offenses, the case of Jordanian, Hussein Abu al-Khair, who remains under threat of execution, attests to the nature of Saudi Arabia’s treatment of those accused of drug crimes. UN special rapporteurs contacted Saudi Arabia about his case, and the judiciary again sentenced him to death on November 26, 2017. The trial had been reinstated on March 9, 2017,after the Supreme Court overturned the first death sentence issued on January 27,2015.

In 2018, Saudi Arabia confirmed its insistence on a policy of detaining or concealing corpses, which causesprofound psychological agony to families. The most recent is the body of journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, whichraises the number of detained bodies to 32.Thisnumber only dates from January 2016, when social justice activist, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, was put to death as part of a mass execution of 47 individuals. It does not count the number of other victims whose bodies have been missing for decades.

Torture and cruel or degrading treatment:

In 2018, Saudi Arabia continued to practice torture against detainees in prisons, and itsmethodsbecame increasingly dangerous and unprecedented, resulting in more victims. In November, information emerged confirmingthat severalfemalehuman rights advocates had been subjected to sexual harassment, beating, whipping, and electric shock, as well as ill-treatment and humiliation, prompting one to attempt suicide.

In March, detainee Ali Jassim al-Nizgha, 61, died in the Mabahith (secret police) prison in Dammam. Reliable information indicated that his family was forbidden to photograph his body, which was later believed to be an effort to conceal the traces of torture that were seen on his body during his funeral preparations. A young man, Habib al-Shuwaikhat, had died in detention in January because of medical negligence and the conditions of his incarceration. This occurred after the Royal Court ignored an urgent and critical letter sent by the young man’s family explaining his deteriorating health and the danger posed tohim by arbitrary detention.

In the General Investigation Directorate (Mabahith) prisons, the Presidency of State Security, which reports directly to the King, practices torture on detainees. One of the detainee victims, Yousef al-Musallab, was subjected to psychological and physical torture that left marks on his face, including redness of the eyes, injuries to his front teeth, and difficulty speaking, while electric shock torture left marks on his hands and fingernails. His health was endangered such that he was transferred to the internal hospital of the Mabahith prison in Dammam more than once. The ESOHR’s reports indicate that the practice of torture continues in Saudi prisons in all its forms – especially since King Salman bin Abdulaziz came to power – including beating on the soles of the feet, electric shock, suspension, burning with cigarettes, kicking, slapping, violent punching, exposure, and sexual harassment.

Saudi Arabia’s torture and cruel treatment affects various detainees, including children and the elderly. Information indicates that individuals over the age of 60 are among those detained, and, despite their age, they are subjected to various forms of torture and cruel treatment, such as withholding of treatment and unhealthy detention conditions.

Despite the many complaints about torture provided to judges by the victims, Saudi Arabia is not known to have investigated or tried any torturers. Likewise, the judiciary continues to base its sentencing decisions on statements extracted under torture. Scores of victims of torture remain under threat of execution, while hundreds of torture victims serve lengthy prison sentences of up to 30 years.

Due process:

The trials of detainees in Saudi Arabia lack the conditions offairness, and severe sentences, including the death penalty, are handed down. There are currently 58 detainees at different stages of litigation who are threatened with execution, denied access to a lawyer during the investigation and pre-trial period,and forbidden from communicating with the outside world.

While Saudi Arabia claimed to have approved changes to improve the judiciary in June 2017, most notably the switchfrom the “Bureau of Investigation and Public Prosecution” to the “Public Prosecution,” this did not affect the fairness of trials, which requires a real rather than merely cosmetic separation amongpowers. Under the resulting changes, the Public Prosecutionis directly subordinate to the King,while the Bureau of Investigation and Public Prosecution reported to the Ministry of Interior. In addition, the sentences requested by the Public Prosecution reflect the official tendency to criminalize peaceful practices,through the facilitation of bringing the death penalty against detainees despite the many flaws surrounding the evidence and forensics used by the judiciary, the frequent reliance on confessions extracted under torture, or charges that in no way are commensurate with the death penalty. In 2018, the Public Prosecution demanded the execution of human rights advocateEsraa Al-Ghomgham, and other activists charged with, among others, participating in demonstrations, traveling to hostile countries, and storing data. The Public Prosecution also sought the execution of Sheikh Salman al-Ouda, Dr. Ali al-Amri, Sheikh Hassan Farhan al-Maliki, and Sheikh Awad al-Qarni, who are charged with calling for change in Saudi Arabia, rallying public opinion, joining assemblies, and adopting intellectual, religious, and historical opinions different from the official perspective.

Child rights:

Although Saudi Arabia has been a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child since 1996, it remains in conflict with the key obligations for protecting children from violations. During 2018, threats to the lives of detained children continued, with eight children remaining under threat of imminent execution after having been subjected to torture and deprived of fair trials. The situation continues despite many international appeals and stands, most recently the statement issued in October by UN experts and rapporteurs urging Saudi Arabia to immediately stop executions.

Furthermore, the emergence of discrepancies in the positions of Saudi Arabia has increased fears for the lives of detained children. Regarding official statements indicating amendments to child law that forbid the death penalty for children, Saudi Arabia replied to a letter from special rapporteurs expressingits belief that the age of a child depends on sensory indicators and not on reaching 18 years of age. This means that Saudi Arabia has given itself wiggle room to determine the age of childhood for each person on a case-by-case basis.

Along with sentencing children to death, Saudi Arabia continues to refuse to hand over the bodies of executed children, including Ali al-Rebh and Walid al-Arayed. Ali al-Rebh was put to death in January 2016, and his family continues to request his body, so they can bury him in his home town of Awamiyah. Walid al-Arayed was killed by live gunfire while standing at the door of his house.

On June 24, the ban on women driving was lifted. Saudi Arabia promoted this step as the beginning of a new stage for women’s rights in the country and used it prominently to burnish its media image. However, on the contrary, women’s rights have seen an unprecedented deterioration along with the lifting of the driving ban.

In May, the Presidency of State Security – which reports directly to King Salman – undertook sudden repressive measures againstwomen’s rights and human rights leaders and defenders. It launched a series of arrest campaigns, includingLoujain al-Hathloul, Aziza al-Yousef, and Iman al-Nafjan, as well asNouf Bint Abdul Aziz, Mayya al-Zahrani, Samar Badawi, and Nassima al-Sadah. Visual artist Noor al-Musallam was also arrested. Female activists have been released at various times, such as Walaa al-Shubr, Aisha al-Manaa’, Madiha al-Ajrush, and Hasah al-Sheikh. The government also arrested Dr. Ruqiya al-Muhareb and human rights advocates, Naima al-Matroud and Esraa al-Ghomgham.

State media railed against the detainees and encouraged charges against them before any official investigations or judicial rulings, describing them as “agents” and “traitors.” Some of the information transmitted about the May arrests and their aftermath indicates a growing number of unknown names. This is famously confirmed by therelease of the name of the activist, Shaden al-Enezi, one of the arrestees of May and its aftermath, nearly seven months after her arrest. This occurs sometimes because of threats or promises from the government to families, which encourages them to keep quiet.

Whereas the Public Prosecutor already demanded the death penalty in August for human rights advocateEsraa al-Ghamgham, in connection with her peaceful rights activism, it is feared that the demand for the death penalty will be repeated in other similar cases of detained women. According to one state-run newspaper, they may face punishments up to and including the death penalty.

These arrests and violations are in addition to written or traditional laws that still perpetuate discrimination against women, particularly the issue of male guardianship over women. Despite the issuance of orders allowing women to obtain some services (putting aside the extent of the effectiveness of these orders and their application in real life), women are still prohibited from traveling without the permission of their guardian, and some institutions still refuse to employ women without the consent of their guardians. In addition, for example, a prisoner is prevented from leaving prison at the end of her sentence unless a man comes to fetch her, which means she may have to stay in prison longer if her “guardian” decides not to show up.

Freedom of opinion and expression and the right to assembly and association:

In 2018, Saudi campaigns against freedom of speech and expression and the right to assemble and form associations continued. From the first month of the year, on January 25, the Specialized Criminal Court handed down prison sentences totalling 21 years against Mohammed al-Atibi and Abdullah al-Atawi. The sentences rest on charges including creating an association without a license, violation of a prior pledge not to engage in activism, participation in the preparation and formulation of several statements, and supporting and signing statements with the goal of dividing the community and violating the security of the country. They were also accused of challenging judicial rulings in cases of prisoners of conscience and of undertaking a hunger strike to compel the concerned parties to act.

In addition, there are no signs that the NGO and civil institutionslaw issued in November 2015 has in any way contributed to lifting the ban on institutional and independent human rights activities. There are still detainees charged with engaging in activity in human rights organizations, and the penalties for charges of human rights activity remain severe.

Also, several requests for the establishment of human rights organizations, submitted by activists known for their struggle and critical attitudes to human rights violations, were not approved. In July, activist, Nassima al-Sadah, was arrested. She had tried since the beginning of 2017 to establish an association under the name “Nun” to defend women’s rights, without receiving a reply.

Saudi Arabia continues to arrest poets, writers, and journalists, including poet, Nawaf al-Rashid, in May after being handed over to Saudi Arabia by Kuwait and forcibly concealed. Nawaf was not known as an opposition activist. His father had been mysteriously killed in Algeria in 2003.

In 2018, Saudi Arabia increased the intensity of its violations by targeting activists and human rights advocates residing abroad, with the aim of retaliating against them by harassing their families at home. In March, Saudi Arabia arrested elderly Aida al-Ghamdi and her two sons. The opposition activities of her son, Abdulla al-Ghamdi, who lives in London, are believed to have been linked to their arrest. Saudi Arabia also targeted family members of Mr. Ali al-Hajji, Omar bin Abdulaziz, and Sheikh Hassan al-Saleh Ali al-Dibisi.

Human rights advocates:

The year 2018 represented a new and greater phase of Saudi repression of men and women defending human rights, extending all the way to demanding the death penalty against them.

In January, activist Noha al-Balawi was arrested arbitrarily, taken to Tabuk prison, and later released, in connection with her publication of widely-circulated video clipsdemanding rights. The Specialized Criminal Court also sentenced human rights advocate Sheikh Mohammed al-Habib to seven years in prison for human rights demands and criticism of official hate speech.

In May, Saudi Arabia launched a series of arbitrary arrests of prominent human rights advocates such as Loujain al-Hathloul, Aziza al-Yousef, Iman al-Nafjan, Mohammed al-Rabiah, and Abdulaziz al-Mash’al, as well as human rights advocate and lawyer, Ibrahim al-Mudeimigh, before releasing him in December. These arrests have been marred by numerous violations, including the enforced disappearance of detainees and the launching of a widespread, distorted, and harsh official media campaign. In June, human rights advocates NoufAbdulaziz and Mayya al-Zahrani were also arbitrarily arrested, joined in July by Samar Badawi and Nassima al-Sadah.

In May, a member of the Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association (ACPRA), Mohammed al-Bajadi, was arrested, joining his fellowACPRA members and founders who are currently detained: Dr. Abdullah al-Hamed, Dr. Mohammed al-Qahtani, Abdulaziz al-Shabaily, Omar al-Saeed, Issa al-Hamed, Abdulkarim Al-Khader, Abdul Rahman al-Hamed, and Fawzan Al-Harbi. In September, Abdullah al-Hamed, Mohammed al-Qahtani, and Walid Abu al-Khair all received the Alternative Nobel Prize for their tireless and courageous efforts to defend human rights in Saudi Arabia.

In a dangerous and unprecedented step, the Public Prosecution requested for the first time the death penalty for a human rights advocate during the trial of Esraa al-Ghomgham, which began in August, 33 months after her arrest. The Public Prosecution’s demand for the death penalty came even thoughall the accusations against her were for peaceful and legal human rights activities. Here trial began with five other activists, four of whom were charged with the death penalty by the prosecutor (her husband, Mr. Musa al-Hashim, Ahmad al-Matroud, Ali Aweishir, and Khaled al-Ghanem). The prosecutionsought up to 20 years in prison for the remaining defendant, Mujtaba al-Muzayn.

The Specialized Criminal Court also issued a six-year prison sentence for human rights advocate, Issa al-Nakhifi, because of his activism and calls for reform, including reform of the popular election of parliament.

Freedom of the press:

In 2018, Saudi Arabia’s violations of freedom of the press reached a critical and unprecedented level. Following the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, it became the world’s most prominent country in media headlines about press freedom violators.

Saudi Arabia claimed that it was fighting corruption following a campaign of arrests in 2017. However, instead of opening the field for the media to play its role in line with Saudi Arabia’s claim to fight corruption, the state arrested journalist Saleh al-Shehhi, and sentenced him on February 8 to five years in prison, followed by five more years during which he is forbidden to travel.The sentence resulted from his televised criticism of the major corruption in the Royal Court, which is the highest authority in the country.

In October, Saudi Arabia acknowledged the killing of journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, inside its consulate in the Turkish city of Istanbul. Khashoggi, who had expressed opinions contrary to the official line and criticized the Crown Prince, was killed by government employeesclose to the prince. UN special rapporteurs have called for an international investigation into the incident. Official Turkish reports noted that Saudi Arabia has not cooperated adequately with the investigation and has not disclosed the whereabouts of Khashoggi’s body after its dismemberment. Various entities have pointed to the Crown Prince’s direct responsibility for this crime, but there are no independent authorities in Saudi Arabia that can even think of questioning or prosecuting Bin Salman. The issue was also subject to politics at the international level, and a clear approach to dealing with the crime, according to independent international mechanisms, did not emerge until the end of 2018.

Saudi laws and policies are not only incapable of protecting freedom of the press, they are also effectively enacting systematic violations of freedom of the press through mechanisms such as the anti-terrorism law, the anti-cybercrime law, and others. Journalists are still in prison, and their numbers are rising, including Alaa Berenji, who ended his fourth year in prison in 2018 for his journalistic work and expression of opinion, and Nazir al-Majid, who suffereda series of attacks following his participation in the 2011 demonstrations and an article he wrote, “I protest, therefore I am human” and who is in prison for seven years. Saudi Arabia also launched a series of arrests of journalists, bloggers, and writers, includingNouf Abdulaziz, Iman al-Nafjan, Dr. Ali Al-Amri, and Mohammed al-Suhaimi. Despite these abuses, as well as the killing of photographers and journalists over the past years, there have been no investigations or trials of those responsible for these violations and crimes.

Saudi Arabia ranks 169th out of 180 countries in the Journalists Without Borders 2018 international ranking of press freedom. In October, the organization warned that Saudi Arabia’s place will drop in the next ranking following the increasing modes of violence against journalists. The approach followed in the country clearly represents a danger and a threat to journalists.

Freedom of religion:

Saudi Arabia has continued to promote changes in its approach to religious freedoms. On more than one occasion, the Crown Prince has indicated that the country will return to“moderate Islam,” and, during 2018, he visited and met with various Christian figures.

Yet, internally, policies restricting religious freedoms have continued. In July, a citizen, Zuhair Hussein Bou Saleh, was arrested to serve a prior sentence of jail and lashingthat had been handed down on charges stemming from practicing his right to worship, including group prayer at his home. He remains a prisoner at the time of this report, despite completing his sentence.

In addition, the changes adopted by Saudi Arabia do not include a remedy for thediscourse against internal religious components. Arrests are still happening because of routine religious practices or because of public debates about differences with religious views officially adopted by the state. This includes the arrest of Sheikh Hassan Farhan al-Maliki, whose trial began with the Public Prosecution demanding the death penalty because of his adoption of religious views that differ from the official ideology. At a symposium organized by the ESOHR on October 10, speakers pointed out that Saudi Arabia also uses hard-line religious interpretations to execute the most vulnerable dissident groups, which is in stark contrast to its claims of openness and moderation.

The Crown Prince’s assurances – particularly in the American magazine, The Atlantic – that the Shia in Saudi Arabia enjoy a normal life and that there are no problems with Shiism, are not apparent on the ground. In September, the government forbid the people of Qatif governorate from holding the annual unified mourning procession, as part of several repressive measures taken against the annual Ashura event. It also detained some of those who participated in poetry readings at these eventsand interrogated them for hours.

These contradictory steps in dealing with the issue of religious freedoms demonstrated that Saudi Arabia does not operate according to clear standards. Its actions were not consistent, and there appeared to be a selectivity between its internal and external moves in terms of domestic and foreign dealings.

Cultural rights:

Amid the continuing targeting of freedom of speech and lack of respect for multiculturalism, Saudi Arabia has systematically targeted poets expressing their opinions.

In January, reports indicated that four poets were sentenced to 15 years in prison: Abdullah Atqan al-Salmi, Mohammed Eid al-Huweiti, Munif al-Munqara, and Sultan al-Shaibani al-Otaibi. They were released in February after being arrested in October 2017, following a poets’ conversation in which they criticized the Crown Prince and his advisors. On March 18, reports were that the poet, Mohammed bin Hazmi al-Qarni, was freed after being held for more than two months without charges.

International reactions:

International criticism of Saudi practices increased during 2018. At the 37thsession of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), which began on February 26, Iceland called for holding HRC member states accountable for their violations, including Saudi Arabia, calling its war on Yemen foolish. Norway also expressed unease at the serious situation of human rights advocates in Saudi Arabia, while Ireland noted deep concern that Saudi Arabia continues to use the death penalty, and Australia expressed worries about the use of the death penalty on children.

During the 38th session, which began on June 18, Norway called on Saudi Arabia to fulfill its obligations as a member of the HRC and expressed its concern about the violations against lawyers, journalists, and women. Iceland considered Saudi Arabia’s move to lift the ban on women driving insufficient, and said it was concerned about the increase in executions. For its part, Germany criticized Saudi executions and stated that they violate international law, target children, and ignore complaints of torture. In turn, the European Union referred to the situation of human rights advocates, stressing that they are not consistent with Vision 2030, while Belgium pointed out that Saudi violations undermine claims of reform.

During the 39thsession of the HRC, which opened on September10, both Finland and France expressed concern about the arrest of women human rights advocates, while Iceland called the recent demands for the death penalty alarming. For its part, Norway called on Saudi Arabia to protect freedoms and to ensure a functioning environment forhuman rights advocates. Iceland reiterated its concern about Saudi Arabia’s violation of the HRC’s basic standards, while Belgium opined that human rights violations threatened the credibility of Saudi promises. The EU stressed its grave concern about reports indicating that the Public Prosecutionhas called for the execution of activists and voiced concern about the arbitrary arrests happeningamidst the promotion of changes and reforms announced by Saudi Arabia under Vision 2030.

At the 31stsession of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review, Saudi Arabia submitted its third national report, which was a concerted attempt to mislead by presenting false facts and information about the human rights situation in the country. Following its submission, the report received hundreds of recommendations from dozens of countries urging them to fix the worseningsituation.

Outside the HRC framework, the Norwegian foreign minister, Marie Eriksen Søreide, speaking in front of parliament in June,described the situation of women in Saudi Arabia as unacceptable, saying it raises questions about the seriousness of reform talk. In August, Canada expressed “deep concern” over a new wave of arrests of human rights activists, including activist, Samar Badawi, which has strained relations between Saudi Arabia and Canada.

On May 30, the European Parliament issued a resolution concerning human rights in Saudi Arabia, calling for an end to the persecution of the female activistsdetained in May (Loujain, Aziza, Iman, and others) and condemning the repression of male and female activists, while at the same time praising these activists. It also called fora review of the system of institutions and civil associations, an immediate halt in the death penalty as a step towards its elimination, and an end to the incitement of hatred and discrimination against religious minorities.

UN bodies:

Saudi Arabia is a member of the HRC for the fourth time and has ratified the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1950), the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1996), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1997), the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1997), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (2000), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2008).

Saudi Arabia’s violation of its international obligations has prompted further criticism. Since the beginning of 2018, the UN apparatus has begun to criticize the kingdom’s human rights record. On January 2, five UN rapporteurs issued a statement pointing to the deteriorating human rights situation in Saudi Arabia, calling for the protection of civil society and regretting the continued use of anti-terrorism and security laws against human rights advocates.

In March, seven rapporteurs called for Saudi Arabia to halt the death sentences against Abbas al-Hassan and others accused of spying for Iran. They also expressed concern that detainees were tortured during interrogation to extract confessions.

In his annual report in April, the special rapporteur on human rights advocates, Mr. Michel Forst, criticized Saudi Arabia’s abuse of UN mechanisms, pointing out that the arguments it makes to justify its practices against human rights advocates are inconsistent with international standards.

In October, UN experts and rapporteurs strongly condemned Saudi practices against femalehuman rights advocates and urgently demanded their unconditional release and the dismissal of charges against them.

In June, seven UN experts and rapporteurs sent a letter to Saudi Arabia asking for clarifications and information on the arrest cases of Loujainal-Hathloul, Iman al-Nafjan, Aisha al-Maana’, and Mohammed al-Bajadi.

In October, on the occasion of the International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists, a statement was issued by United Nations rapporteurs and experts, in which they stressed that the United Nations and the international community had failed to address the enforced disappearance and murder of Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi. They also argue that recent facts have once again proved the considerable expansion of political incitement against journalists.

In the October statement, the rapporteurs and experts urged Saudi Arabia to immediately halt the executions of Ali al-Nimr, Dawood al-Marhoon, Abdullah al-Zaher, Mujtaba al-Sweikat, Salman Al Quraysh, and Abdulkarim al-Hawaj, who have all been detained since they were children or whose charges go back to when they were children.

In a July legal opinion, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention called for the immediate release of human rights advocate Walid Abu al-Khair, an investigation of the circumstances surrounding his detainment, and appropriate measures against those responsible for the violation of his rights. The group expressed its concern that his arrest was part of Saudi practices that may constitute crimes against humanity.

In March, the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women submitted its final recommendations to Saudi Arabia, including recommendations to amend laws, protect women, and strengthen the role of femalehuman rights advocates.

During its 20thsession in October, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities issued a resolution on the case of disabled and condemned-to-death protestor, Munir Adam, stating that Saudi Arabia is violating its obligations under the Protection of Persons with Disabilities Act and called upon the government to provide him with effective remedies, including the investigation of his allegations of torture.

Likewise, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) has criticized Saudi practices on more than one occasion, with a repetition that UNHCR had not pledged in previous years. In May, UNHCHR’s statement highlighted the disappearance of Nawaf al-Rashid as part of Saudi Arabia’s arbitrary arrests. In May, the UNHCHR also issued a statement calling on Saudi Arabia to release men and women detained on the basis of their human rights activities and to ensure their protection.

In July, UNHCHR voiced its concern about the continued arbitrary arrests of human rights advocates and activists in Saudi Arabia, including women’s rights advocates, and called for their release.

Upon assuming the role of UNHCHR, Michelle Bachelet, in her opening remarks to the 39thsession of the HRC on September 10, raised the Saudi file, expressing her deep concern about violations that contradict official promises.

During 2018,special rapporteurs contacted Saudi Arabia about several cases and asked for clarifications about alleged violations. In February, rapporteurs contacted Saudi Arabiaabout the cases of 32 detainees at risk of execution. In March, special rapporteurs sent a letter to Saudi Arabia about the war in Yemen and inquired about the case of activist Noha al-Balawi.

In June, special rapporteurs sent a letter about the arrest of Iman al-Nafjan, Loujain al-Hathloul, and Mohammed al-Bajadi. Also in June, they sent a letter about issues related to the war in Yemen. In July, special rapporteurs sent a letter about human rights advocateKhalid al-Ameer. In August, two letters arrived in Saudi Arabia: one about the war in Yemen and the other about the blockade of Qatar.

In October, three letters from special rapporteurs were sent to Saudi Arabia. The first one concerned journalist Jamal Khashoggi; the second one related to the cases of six detained women, Esraa al-Ghomgham, Samar Badawi, Nassima al-Sadah, Nouf Abdulaziz, Mayya al-Zahrani, and Dr. Hatoon al-Fassi; and the third letter sent by the rapporteurs asked about the cases of six childrensentenced to death: Ali al-Nimr, Dawood al-Marhoon, Abdullah al-Zaher, Mujtaba al-Sweikat, Salman Quraish, and Abdulkarim al-Hawaj.

Saudi Arabia ignored some of the rapporteurs’ messages and did not respond or gave negative responses to other messages.

Conclusion:

In 2018, Saudi violations reached an all-time high in the history of the country, with the emergence of types and levels of crimes and violations that had not occurredpreviously, such as the mass arrest campaigns of women, the demand for the death penaltyfor a female human rights advocate, and the sadistic killing of a journalist in a Saudi consulate that is supposed to serve and protect its citizens abroad.

The deterioration of the human rights situation coincides with the Crown Prince’s promises of reform, which is a reliable method of misinformation and lack of credibility in official statements.

The deterioration of 2018 has proved that unilateral control over power is a grave threat to human rights and that promisesdo not materialize without an independent institutional structure that provides a suitable environment for the functioning of an effective civil society and free media capable of playing a vital role in halting human rights violations and crimes.

What happened in 2018 spells out Saudi Arabia’s acute lack of good governance, including full respect for human rights, the rule of law, active participation, political pluralism, transparent and accountable processes and institutions, political empowerment of the people, and equality. Lack of transparency, accountability, participation, and responsiveness to the needs of the people were the salient features of governance in Saudi Arabia underthe reign of King Salman in 2018.

On 10 December 2018, international Human Rights Day, ALQST hosted a conference to assess the state of human rights in Saudi Arabia. Representatives from Amnesty International, European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR), Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR), Human Rights Watch (HRW), International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), MENA Rights Group and Reporters Without Borders (RSF) all took part, issuing the appeal below.

Saudi Arabian academic, Hala al-Dosari and a representative ofthe United Kingdom-based Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) also took part in the gathering.

Today, on Human Rights Day 2018, human rights organisations working on Saudi Arabia call on the authorities to take eight specific measures in order to improve the human rights situation in the country and in countries where they exercise influence:

Commit to freedom of expression, association and assembly

End the harassment, prosecution and conviction of anyone for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association or assembly;

Release, immediately and unconditionally, all persons imprisoned solely for the peaceful exercise of these rights, such as human rights activists, including women’s rights defenders; lawyers; journalists; political activists, peaceful protesters and users of social media. Their imprisonment is considered arbitrary under international law and convictions on this basis must be quashed and there should be remedies available for all those arbitrarily detained;

Repeal or substantially amend laws, including the Anti-Cyber Crime Law, to ensure that criticism of government policy and practice, and of officials, as well as other forms of protected speech by journalists, social media users and anyone who peacefully expresses a view, are not criminalised; and

Repeal the Law on Associations and related legislation or substantially amend it to bring it into full conformity with international law and standards, and allow the formation of independent human rights organizations.

Commit to international standards in the administration of justice

Ensure that there is a recognised, criminal and legal basis for every arrest; that those arrested are aware of the basis for the arrest and are also able to challenge it before a judge, within 48 hours of the arrest; that detainees have access to family and legal representation of their own choice from within 24 hours of the arrest;

Ensure that trials are conducted in line with international fair trial standards, including, inter alia, the right to prepare an effective defense and challenge the evidence and witnesses in a given case;

Ensure a separation of powers; that the judiciary be independent;

Release detainees whose sentences have expired and those who are held without charge; and

Ensure that all persons are equal before the law, so that no one in a position of power enjoys immunity or impunity.

End the use of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment

Implement the 2016 recommendations of the Committee against Torture in respect to Saudi Arabia’s treaty obligations as a state party to the United Nations Convention against Torture, and publicise the steps taken[1];

Put an end to the practice of incommunicado detention and ensure that every detainee has access to their family and a lawyer of their choice;

Ensure that all allegations of torture and other ill-treatment are thoroughly, independently and impartially investigated and those suspected of criminal responsibility are brought to justice;

Improve the management and oversight of prisons so that prisoners are treated humanely and their rights are respected. Ensure that all places of detention conform to the Mandela Rules (the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners); and

Ensure that no statement obtained under coercion, including torture or other ill-treatment, is invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against the person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made; persons convicted on the basis of “confessions” extracted under torture or ill-treatment must be promptly re-tried in civilian courts in fair proceedings that exclude such statements, or released.

Advance the rights of women

Implement the 2018 recommendations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in respect to Saudi Arabia’s treaty obligations as a state party to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;[2]

Ensure that women are able to take an active part in society and that laws and regulations protect women from domestic violence, oppression and marginalisation; and

Abolish the male guardianship system and remove restrictions that prevent women’s equality with men before the law in the enjoyment of all human rights and ensure their active participation in society, including the rights to freedom of movement, education, employment, marriage and redress for violations.

Abolish the death penalty

Immediately establish an official moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty;

Pending full abolition of the death penalty, stop using the death penalty and suspend pending death sentences;

Stop using the death penalty against persons under the age of 18 at the time of the crime, in line with Saudi Arabia’s obligations under international law, notably as a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child; and againstany person having mental or intellectual disabilities; and

Ensure that foreign nationals arrested, detained or imprisoned have adequate access to consular and interpretation services.

Ensure the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism

Abolish the Specialised Criminal Court as it is fundamentally unfair and lacks internationally recognised standards of impartiality and judicial independence and repeal or substantially amend the Penal Law for Crimes of Terrorism and its Financing and the Anti-Cybercrime Law to ensure that the provisions adhere tointernational human rights law and standards;

Explain publicly to the Saudi Arabian people how the government differentiates between the right to freedom of expression and terrorism, and

Ensure that the definition of terrorism does not extend to include peaceful opposition, peaceful protesters or peaceful civic activism, and that countering terrorism is not used as an excuse to suppress fundamental liberties.

Promote a culture of respect to human rights, including by promoting the rights of cultural diversity

Implement the 2016 recommendations of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in respect to Saudi Arabia’s treaty obligations as a state party to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and publicise the steps taken;[3]

Review the content of all primary and secondary educational curricula to ensure that it does not promote discrimination or serve to undermine human rights standards; and

Prohibit advocacy of hatred that constitutes incitement to hostility, discrimination or violence on the basis of race, religion, sex, nationality or other discriminatory grounds.

With respect to the conflict in Yemen

Fully comply with international humanitarian law in the planning and execution of any airstrikes, including to ensure civilians and civilian objects are not targeted and to end indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks harming civilians;

Take all feasible measures to minimise harm to civilians, including giving advance effective warnings of impending attacks to civilian populations in affected areas;

Ensure all humanitarian workers are granted freedom of movement and ensure the rapid and unimpeded delivery of impartial humanitarian relief for civilians in need, and lift arbitrary restrictions on commercial imports of essential goods;

Cooperate fully with the investigation by the Group of Eminent Experts mandated by the UN Human Right Council to carry out a comprehensive examination of all alleged violations and abuses of international human rights and other appropriate and applicable fields of international law committed by all parties to the conflict in Yemen since September 2014; and

Ensure independent, impartial investigations are conducted into allegations of war crimes, and that, where there is sufficient admissible evidence, those suspected of responsibility — including command responsibility — are prosecuted in fair trials.

The European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR) is monitoring 58 cases in which prisoners have received death sentences at various levels of the judicial process in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This monitoring is ongoing despite the government’s strict silence with regards to execution, victims’ issues, their court proceedings, intimidation of their families, and concealment of sensitive information about them.

ESOHR has documented and detailed in its report several of these issues, including violations and excesses that demonstrate the injustice of these sentences. It also affirmed that Saudi Arabia continues to adhere to a specific approach towards these cases.

This includes violations from the very beginning of the arrest, such as enforced disappearance and forbidding contact with a lawyer or the outside world. The report also confirmed that several of the prisoners were subjected to torture during the investigation phase to extract confessions that the judiciary uses when issuing their rulings. In addition to that, the report uncovered that the charges brought against most of the prisoners were not among the most serious offenses under international law. Rather, most of the charges are political, or relate to expressing one’s opinion and participating in demonstrations. However, Saudi Arabia consistently claims that it does not invoke the death penalty except for the most dangerous criminals.

According to ESOHR’s monitoring, some of these cases included mass death sentences, such as the case involving 12 people at risk of execution who were charged with being affiliated with what the government considers an Iranian spy cell. Likewise, there is the case of 14 young men sentenced to death for participating in demonstrations in 2011 with the charge of terrorism after mass hearings. These sentences were validated by the Supreme Court and may be executed at any moment; some of them have already been transferred to the Presidency of State Security for execution. Eight individuals in the case were sentenced even though they were minors: Ali Al-Nimr, Abdullah al-Zaher, Abdel-Karim El-Hawaj, Dawoud al-Marhoon, Said al-Skafi, Salman al-Quraish, Mujtaba al-Sweikat, and Abdullah Al-Sarih.

Additionally, the Public Prosecutor called for the execution of five human rights activists (Israa al-Ghomgham, Ahmed Al-Matrood, Ali al-Uwaysheer, Moussa al-Hashem, and Khaled al-Ghanem) in a mass trial, charging them with participating in demonstrations and spreading resources harmful to public order. Likewise, the Public Prosecutor demanded the execution of Sheikh Salman al-Ouda, Sheikh Aoud al-Qarni, and Dr. Ali al-Omari, who were charged for their opinions. It also demanded the execution of the distinguished Islamic scholar Hassan Farhan al-Maliki, charged for his religious beliefs that conflict with the official extremist religious institution.

ESOHR believes that the prisoners currently threatened with execution at various levels of the judicial process are proof that the Saudi government uses this form of punishment as a means for silencing individuals and keeping the public completely ignorant of international laws and commitments it has sworn to uphold.

In August 2018, ESOHR also monitored the case of 51 prisoners facing death sentences at various levels of the judicial process. With this new report, it is clear that the Saudi government has added some new names to its death list.

In light of the latest information concerning the Saudi government’s secrecy and lack of statement over the execution of an Indonesia housemaid, something traditionally done by the Ministry of Interior, ESOHR believes that it is impossible to anticipate what may happen to those prisoners sentenced to death, raising concerns over their lives and the lives of others whose cases go unobserved.

]]>https://www.esohr.org/en/?feed=rss2&p=205502055Serious concerns on the lives of political prisoners sentenced to death in Saudi Arabia after their files were sent to PSS for implementationhttps://www.esohr.org/en/?p=2045
https://www.esohr.org/en/?p=2045#respondThu, 29 Nov 2018 09:01:06 +0000http://www.esohr.org/en/?p=2045لقراءته بالعربية اضغط هنا

ESOHR, ADHRB and OMCT are concerned over the imminent execution in Saudi Arabia of 15 individuals and call on the government to annul their death sentences.

Abbas Al-Hassan

On 1 November 2018, the case of 12 men convicted of spying for Iran and spreading the Shia faith, including that of Abbas Al-Hassan, was atransferred to the Presidency of the State Security (PSS) by Royal Decree, indicating what may be their imminent execution, despite concerns about the fairness of their trials by the international community and the United Nations. The PSS was established by royal decree in mid-2017, with the intelligence and security capabilities previously held by the Ministry of Interior and directly overseen by the King.

During trial, which was held in breach of basic fair trial rights, a number of the defendants confirmed before the judge that during interrogation they had been subjected to torture to extract confessions. In spite of this, their sentences were based on evidence obtained under these conditions. Those arrested and tried additionally indicated that they were denied access to legal representation during questioning, and that their lawyers were not allotted sufficient time to adequately present a proper defense. Moreover, a number of the charges that the defendants faced did not constitute crimes under international law, including dissemination of the Shia faith.
In a separate case, according to sources close to the families, three other young men sentenced to death were transferred to Riyadh on 7 November 2018. This included Mustafa al-Khayat, convicted on charges such as participating in demonstrations, disrupting security, and carrying weapons. Although their location is currently unknown, it is believed that these individuals were transferred to Haer prison days after an exceptional visit from their families. The move bears concerning similarities to executions that occurred in July 2017, when four prisoners were moved to the capital to enforce their death sentences. Similar steps were also taken in the case of Sheikh Nimr, executed in 2016.

Moustafa al-khyat

The Saudi government’s record of unfair trials and executions have previously attracted the attention of UN human rights experts, who have issued repeated urgent appeals urging the Kingdom to ensure fair trial rights and to halt the execution of prisoners accused of espionage for Iran as well as death sentences on children. The UN Committee against Torture had also raised these concerns in their recommendations to Saudi Arabia during the country’s review in 2016.

Given the recent measures taken by the Saudi government to refer the 12 men’s case to the PSS and to relocate the prisoners to Haer prison as well as the Kingdom’s poor human rights track record, we express serious concerns for the safety and physical and mental integrity of the 15 individuals, who may be executed at any time without their families being notified.

We call for the Saudi government to comply with its obligations under international human rights law, including the Convention against Torture, halt the executions of the 15 men and annul their death sentences. We also call for any re-trial to be conducted in accordance with international law and standards in order to ensure that fair trial rights are respected.

During its 20th Session in July-September 2018, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) issued a decision on the case of Saudi national Munir Adam finding Saudi Arabia in violation of its obligations under the CPRD and calling upon the kingdom to provide him with effective remedies, including an investigation into his claims of torture. Americans for Democracy & Human Rights in Bahrain (ADHRB) and the European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR) welcome the Committee’s Decision, and support its findings that Saudi Arabia has violated its treaty obligations, and the human rights of Mr.Adam.

Munir Adam is a Saudi citizen who was arrested in 2012 and tortured. Security forces beat him so severely during this torture that he permanently lost hearing in one ear. After pre-trial detention of more than three years, during which he was denied access to legal counsel, Munir was convicted and sentenced to death in the Specialized Criminal Court – the court system used to prosecute crimes of state security – using statements and confessions that had been coerced through torture. Among the charges against him were participating in “violent acts” at a protest in 2012 and “sending texts.” His death sentence was upheld on appeal in May 2017, and confirmed by the High Court on 23 July 2017. As such, he has exhausted all domestic remedies, and is at imminent risk of execution.

Munir suffered an injury as a child which caused partial loss of hearing in his right ear. On 8 April 2012, Saudi security forces arrested him and transported him to the Al-Qatif police station, where security force officials tortured him. He was tortured again two weeks later in the General Directorate of Investigation in Al Dammam, a detention facility overseen by the Ministry of Interior – the government body most responsible for human rights abuses like arbitrary detention, enforced disappearance, and torture. This time, the torturers kicked him on the face and body repeatedly, which caused his hearing impairment to worsen. He asked for medical attention, which the Saudi authorities denied for more than four months. In August 2012, a doctor in the military hospital confirmed his accelerated hearing loss and informed the prison administration that urgent surgery was necessary. The prison administration ignored this advice, and continued to neglect Munir’s condition for a further six months, resulting in complete and irreversible loss of hearing in his right ear.

Munir’s case was submitted to the CRPD in 2016, citing violations of Articles 4, 15, 16, and 25 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which prohibit discrimination against individuals with disabilities in access to justice, as well as torture and ill treatment, and require States to assist victims of violence and provide health care to persons with disabilities. Despite multiple opportunities and requests from the Committee, the only response by the Saudi government was to object to the case’s admissibility before the CRPD, and they failed to respond to any of the substance of the complaint. After the High Court confirmed Munir’s death sentence, the CRPD requested a stay of execution for Mr. Adam while his case was under consideration.

During its 20th Session in September 2018, the Committee reached a Decision in Munir’s case, holding that Saudi Arabia has failed to fulfil its treaty obligations under Articles 4, 13(1), 15, 16, and 25 of the Convention. In its conclusion, the CRPD notes that Saudi Arabia is under an obligation to investigate Munir’s torture and to compensate him for the loss of hearing in his right ear. The Committee also stated that Saudi Arabia is obligated to “review his conviction with the guarantees enshrined in the Convention, including through the exclusion of the evidence obtained under torture; the permanent suspension of solitary confinement; the full access to his representatives; the provision of adapted procedural accommodations to ensure that the author can effectively take part to the procedure; and the access to health services needed by the author.” The Committee also noted Saudi Arabia’s obligations to prevent similar acts in the future, by prohibiting torture in the justice system, investigating allegations of torture, ensuring medical access in detention, and consider abolition of the death penalty.

“The CRPD’s Decision is significant, because Munir’s case is emblematic of broader concerns we have long raised, in particular of torture, ill treatment, and unfair trials that Saudi Arabia has long perpetrated against dissidents ,” said Husain Abdulla, Executive Director of ADHRB. “While MunirAdam is just one of many individuals who have been convicted on the basis of tortured confessions and unfair trials at the Specialized Criminal Court, the Committee’s Decision calls attention to Saudi Arabia’s disdain and non-compliance with international human rights standards and treaty body standards more broadly. Saudi Arabia must take concrete steps to fulfil its obligations in order to prevent these violations from occurring again to others in detention.”

“ESOHR welcomes the Decision from the Committee, which confirms what we have known about Saudi Arabia for years – that they torture individuals and violate human rights obligations to convict and execute individuals for their political beliefs,” said Ali Adubisi, Executive Director of ESOHR. “Munir’s case is an example of the practices of Saudi Arabia against persons with disabilities in their prisons, with the Saudi authorities ignoring all their commitments. Munir still may face execution despite the Committee’s Decision.”

ADHRB and ESOHR welcome the Decision of the Committee, and insure that according to the commitments of the Saudi government it should heed the recommendations of the CPRD, particularly by halting Munir Adam’s pending execution, annulling his conviction, investigating allegations of torture, and ensuring access to medical care for all individuals in detention facilities.

The repression and targeting practiced by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in recent years against the people, activists, and human rights advocates has driven hundreds, if not thousands, to emigrate from the country.In emigrating, their goal is either to protect themselves from being targeted for execution, torture, prison, and unjust sentences; to freely engage in various political, rights, and media activities; or to address the country’s increasing tyranny, especially since the beginning of the reign of King Salman and his son in 2015.

After the government rid itself of internal activists and destroyed the structure of independent civil society, it turned to activists abroad to complete its repressive plan to stop the remaining voices from speaking freely. The government has used various methods, some mild and others harsh. The case of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who vanished after entering the Saudi consulate in Turkey, exposed Saudi Arabia’s intentions and methods towards its citizens abroad who exercise their right to freedom of opinion and who demand reforms.

The European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights (ESOHR) has monitored and documented certain practices Saudi Arabia has used against some of the families and relatives of activists abroad. From what it has learned, the ESOHR believes that these are retaliatory measures concealed behind faulty laws, which has made virtual hostages of the victims who are in the activists’ inner circle.

Abdullah Al-Ghamdi

Saudi political activist (born April 19, 1975) living in Britain. Beginning in 2002, he spoke secretly about human rights violations while he was in Saudi Arabia. In 2004, after his emigration to Britain, he began to publicly demand civil, political, and social rights through blogging and media participation, and then through social media.

On March 26, 2018, the Saudi government arrested his elderly mother, Aida Al-Ghamdi. Security forces raided her home in the Jeddah governorate, arresting her and her son, Adel, without any judicial warrant, and taking them to an unknown location. Later, it became clear that they were in the Jeddah prison. Meanwhile, the government also raided the home of Al-Ghamdi’s brother, Sultan, who lives in the Dammam governorate. He was arrested by security forces wearing plainclothes and claiming that they were planning to undermine state security.

Political activist Abdullah Al-Ghamdi published a statement after the arrests, indicating that the reason for his mother’s arrest was his gift to her of a small amount of money that did not exceed the standard requirements.

Aida is a housewife, Adel is a student, and Sultan is an employee. None of them engages in political activity. The Saudi government prevented Aida, Adel, and Sultan from communicating with family members, informing relatives of the details of their arrests, and contacting lawyers.

Sultan was released on April 20, 2018, and he posted a video on Twitter on April 22, in which he attacked his brother and confirmed that his family was arrested because of the money they received from Abdullah.

Abdullah received information reporting that Sultan was forced to produce the video. Furthermore, the family has no information on Sultan’s whereabouts. There are rumors that his brother is under house arrest, and some activists have demanded on Twitter that the Saudi authorities disclose his whereabouts. On June 28, 2018, the family was permitted monthly visits with Adel and Aida, but they remain deprived of the majority of their legal rights.

The arrest of Al-Ghamdi’s family was accompanied by an official Saudi media campaign charging them, before an investigation or a trial, with terrorism and with plotting to destabilize state security.

Sheikh Hassan Al-Salah

Saudi political activist (born April 10, 1971) living in Iran. He has not visited Saudi Arabia for five years for fear of being arrested for his activist background and the political opinions that he has published in the media and on social media.

The Saudi government is currently pressuring Al-Salah’s family. On December 20, 2017, it arbitrarily arrested his brother, Naji Al-Salah, accusing him of communicating with his brother and supporting his activities. He was tortured and remains in solitary confinement.

In addition, despite her advanced age, Al-Salah’s mother was summoned and accused of communicating with her son. The remaining brothers were threatened with arrest if they communicated with Al-Salah.

Because of his fear of arrest and being handed over to Saudi Arabia based on security agreements, Al-Salah also has not gone to Jordan– where his autistic and developmentally disabled son lives– despite his need to renew his son’s residency. This has pushed his son’s school to threaten to deprive him of schooling and to expel him from the school. According to Al-Salah, the government has attempted to carry out a plan to arrest him in Jordan, whereby the school administration contacted him and requested he come to Jordan to renew his son’s passport to prevent the suspension of his studies. Al-Salah did not go, and he learned afterwards that the Mabahith (Saudi secret police) told his detained brother, prior to the school’s contact, that they would be bringing in his brother within days.

Currently, the documents concerning his son are in the possession of the Saudi embassy in Jordan, and the embassy will not renew the documents unless the father or his representative is present. Al-Salah knows that he will be arrested if he goes to Jordan or the embassy. He has not seen his son for almost six years.

Omar bin Abdulaziz Al-Zahrani

Saudi political activist (born January 4, 1991) living in Canada. He began his studies in Canada as an exchange student in 2009. He left Saudi Arabia for the last time in 2012. Because of his activism that began during his time in Canada, the Saudi government halted financial support for his educational exchange. It became clear that he would be in danger if he returned to Saudi Arabia again and could face arrest, torture, and trial. This pushed him to apply for asylum in 2013, and in February 2015, he was granted the right to political asylum.

Omar is active on social media, where his tweets criticize the policies and violations of the Saudi government, especially against detainees. He has used social media networks to discuss various rights, regularly addressing issues, including, most recently, the crisis between Saudi Arabia and Canada and the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Omar has received verbal messages from sources close to the government demanding that he refrain from speaking or face consequences.

On August 22, 2018, Omar posted a video in which he confirmed the arrest of two of his brothers and eight of his friends. In the video, he indicated that the reason for the arrests was his failure to reply to a letter from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, delivered to him weeks before by his brother, Ahmed, and two other men. They came to negotiate with him and convince him to return to Saudi Arabia, guaranteeing that bin Salman would ensure that he would not suffer harm upon his return. Currently, the brothers and friends of Omar bin Abdulaziz remain under arbitrary detention. Omar reported on his Twitter account that his brother Ahmed was tortured by electric shock and his brother Abdul Al-Majid was waterboarded.

Ali Hashim Al-Haji

Saudi political activist (born November 1, 1983) living in Lebanon. He left Saudi Arabia in 2017, after he was summoned to an inquiry before the Specialized Criminal Court, which was established primarily to try those accused of terrorism but also tries activists and opinion-makers. Al-Haji was summoned because of his social media activism and his criticism of government policies and the oppression of its citizens. He continued his activities after he left Saudi Arabia, where he speaks out on social media and conventional media about violations and arrests and demands civil and political rights.

In 2018, Al-Haji’s family, including his wife and five children, visited him in Lebanon. In August 2018, upon their temporary return to Saudi Arabia, they were detained at the Dammam airport for three hours. His wife faced insults, threats, and questioning about her husband and his activities, and she was forced to put her fingerprints on a document of unknown contents. The security forces also proceeded to confiscate all of the family’s passports, and they are currently forbidden to travel.

Ali Al-Dabisi

Saudi human rights defender (born October 17, 1980) living in Germany. He was arbitrarily arrested twice, in 2011 and 2012, during the arbitrary arrest campaigns that took place in Saudi Arabia concurrent with the demonstrations and protests in the country during the events of the Arab Spring.

Al-Dabisi was arrested on May 2, 2011, at one of the checkpoints leading to the city of Safwa, because he had various books in his vehicle. He was placed in solitary confinement and interrogated until he was released on May 4, 2011. In September 2011, he was re-arrested at the same checkpoint, also because of books and papers in his car. He was imprisoned without charges until his release in August 2012. Eight months after his release, the Mabahith summoned him for questioning without explanation and demanded his attendance. This raised fear of his arbitrary re-arrest and subjection to torture or unfair trial, which pushed him to leave Saudi Arabia in April 2013.

In Germany, Al-Dabisi began his rights activism. He founded, along with Saudi citizens, the ESOHR, whose aim is to publicize violations, supply the media with events in the rights situation, and to present reports to the various concerned UN bodies.

In September 2016, the official Saudi Press Agency unexpectedly published a news article that noted that Al-Dabisi had not attended a scheduled court hearing in April 2016. It set another hearing for him to be tried under the law against terrorism and its financing, which is known for being used against activists and human rights advocates. In addition, sources informed Al-Dabisi, in the summer of 2016, that there was a warrant for his arrest in Arab countries on charges of undermining national security.

On August 18, 2017, the minor son of Al-Dabisi’s sister, Mohammed Al-Labad (born February 17, 2001), was arbitrarily arrested at a checkpoint and transported, without charge, to the Awamiya police station. In April 2018, Mohammed’s mother, Ibtisam Al-Dabisi, was summoned by the Mabahith in Qatif, where she was threatened with arrest and told that what she wrote on her Twitter account about her son was considered incitement against the state and an electronic crime that authorized her arrest. During her questioning, Ibtisam was asked about the activities of her brother and told to tell him to stop his activities and return to Saudi Arabia.

In the course of her interrogation, Ibtisam asked the authorities to release her son, and the interrogators replied: How can we release him when his uncle is continuing his activities?

Mohammed was placed in a non-juvenile prison, and the government brought charges against him, which he was forced to sign, that he had participated in demonstrations, repeated slogans against the state, and carried Molotov cocktails.

Offers to return

In addition to targeting their families at home, activists living abroad encounter various methods to eliminate their activities. Many of them receive communications and calls, both direct and indirect, from the government urging them to return to Saudi Arabia in exchange for guarantees that they would not be persecuted or arrested. Among them are the vice-president of the ESOHR, Adel Al-Said, and lawyer and human rights defender, Taha Al-Haji, who was contacted by the Saudi embassy in Berlin and asked to return to Saudi Arabia after he had left to avoid arrest. These practices cause activists to fear the possibility that these are the first steps before escalation against them or the families back home.

The ESOHR believes that the harassment of the families of dissidents, activists, and human rights advocates living abroad is part of the Saudi government’s policies to curb freedoms and independent civil activity.

The ESOHR affirms that these practices violate international law that guarantees freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the Declaration On Human Rights Defenders that was adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 10, 1998, in which Article 12 states: “The State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually and in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise.”

The ESOHR emphasizes that these violations are retaliatory and are a form of blackmail that aims to stop activists from exercising their legitimate right to freedom of opinion. What is happening to family members of activists is another example of the unprecedented repression that characterizes King Salman’s reign.

The targeting of family members of activists and those close to them – whether by threat, harassment, or arrest – is a practice of intimidation that destroys the feeling of security of those close to activists and adds another black mark to Saudi Arabia’s record on human rights.